1 John 3:9 – Those "Born of God" Do Not Sin?

Reprinted with permission from Faith Pulpit, November/December ‘05

Four views that appeal to this verse

1. The works-righteousness view

This view teaches that one earns or keeps salvation by good works, and thus that the person who chooses to sin has forfeited any right to heaven. This view contradicts the Bible’s clear teaching on salvation as God’s gift through faith (Ephesians 2:8-9), purchased for us not by our works but by the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross (Romans 3:24-25, 2 Corinthians 5:21, 1 Peter 2:24).

2. The instantaneous sanctification/Wesleyan view

This view states that it is possible for a believer to have an experience following conversion in which the principle or root of sin is removed and replaced by love for God. 1 John 3:9 does not support this view but, rather, argues against a second work of grace by implying that one who sins has never been born of God.

3. The progressive sanctification/perseverance view

This view recognizes that believers occasionally sin but argues that, because they have been regenerated, it is impossible for believers to habitually practice sin. This view has much to commend it but is not entirely satisfactory upon consideration of a literal rendering of the verse (see Five Factors, 1. The text).

4. The sinless seed/new nature/Holy Spirit view

This view argues that it is not the believer who is sinless but rather God’s seed that remains in each believer. This view has much to commend it as well but is not entirely satisfactory because it fails to distinguish in this verse between God’s seed and the one who has been begotten of God.

Conclusion: none of these views is completely satisfactory. I believe a correct understanding of verse nine must incorporate elements from both of these last two views.

Five Factors to consider in developing a correct understanding

1. The text: 1 John 3:9

This author’s literal rendering of this verse says, “Each one having been begotten (or born) of God does not do sin because His (God’s) seed in him remains, and he (or it) is not able to sin because He (or it) has been begotten (or born) of God.”

2. The context: 1 John 3:4-10

Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. 5And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. 6Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him. 7Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God. 10In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother. 11For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another, 12not as Cain who was of the wicked one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil and his brother’s righteous. (NKJV)

3. The identity of the “sin” the verse is talking about

a. Sin as lawlessness: verse 4. This verse is not describing a failure to obey a particular law but the general attitude of lawlessness.

b. Sin as failure to practice righteousness: verse 6. The present tense of the verb and its participle support the idea that this is not describing an occasional sin but the practice of sin.

c. Sin as failure to love one’s brother: verse 10. Most interpretations overlook the fact that often in 1 John 3 the “sin” being referred to is actually failure to love one’s brother (see verses 10-23).

4. The phrase “He [or it] is not able to sin”

In 1 John 3:9 two distinct identities are described: (a) the one having been begotten of God and (b) God’s seed. In sorting out what is being said in this verse about each of these two things, it should be noted that the third person singular ending on a verb can be translated, “he,” “she,” or “it.”

This being the case, verse 9 could be interpreted: “Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin …because he is born of God.” The omitted words would refer to God’s seed and would explain why the one born of God cannot do [poieō] sin: “for God’s seed [which is the Holy Spirit or new nature] remains in him and it [God’s seed] is not able to sin.”

5. The truth that believers are able to practice sin and become enslaved to it.

1 John 1:7-10 states,

But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. 8If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Elsewhere in Scripture it is clear that believers can choose to practice sin. In Romans 6:12-13 Paul admonishes his readers,

Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.

Paul’s admonition shows that it is possible for a believer to let sin reign in the body, but it also shows that it is possible for a believer to refuse to let sin reign. And in verses 14-16 Paul makes it clear that, while sin cannot cause God’s law to send believers to hell, choosing to sin can cause believers to become enslaved to it. He says,

For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace. 15What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

Paul’s admonition, however, does not imply that there is no observable difference in the behavior of a believer and that of an unbeliever. 1 John 3:10 explains, “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.” But this verse also explains that the primary observable difference between the behavior of a believer and that of an unbeliever involves love (or concern for the wellbeing) of other believers. 1 John 3:11-19 supports this understanding.

Conclusion: Because true believers possess God’s seed and it is not able to sin, their behavior will be observably different from that of unbelievers. This difference will be especially evident in their love and concern for other believers.


Myron J. Houghton is the Senior Professor of Systematic Theology and director of the Master of Arts Theological Studies program at Faith Baptist Theological Seminary. He taught at Denver Baptist Bible College and Theological Seminary before coming to Faith in 1983.

Discussion

[Charlie]
[Aaron Blumer]

What I mean is the view that turns all references to “do” into “practice.” While it’s true that a present tense/aspect in Greek can have the English idea of progressive action (ongoing) it’s still going another step further to turn “whoever is doing sin” into “whoever practices sin.”.
Charlie, what are your thoughts on the use of the present tense in I John 1:8? I have no trouble translating both of these verses as durative.

"The Midrash Detective"

[Jerry Shugart] “Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him” (1 Jn.3:6).

John says “sinneth not” here so this verse is certainly not speaking of “continually sinning.” Are we to suppose that the meaning of these words here are to be completely divorced from these words?:

“Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God” (1 Jn.39).
No, it’s speaking of not continually sinning. The negative part “not” doesn’t have any aspect or tense, all of that comes from the verb.

So the verb itself Charlie (and just about everybody) says is “continually sinning” … then you add the “not.”

Charlie:

I think I follow most of what you posted on the verb grammar there, Charlie. It’s interesting that after a heap of Greek analysis we end up in almost the same place we are just taking a very literal English reading… that is, determining the meaning from the context. I’m not suggesting here that the grammatical analysis is not of value though. Because every generation has to produce a solid group of language-competent people to keep the translations connected to the original.

(And I also believe pastors should be skilled enough to make good use of the tools)

At the same time it’s comforting—whenever possible—to be able to go to the pulpit and make a case for ‘interpretation A’ that folks in the pews could have arrived at themselves via the context.

I believe it will be a while before I feel that I have a good handle on John. I think part of the answer may lie in repeatedly reading through entire epistles aloud. There is something very non-western about how John communicates. (Perhaps he is just far less Greek in his thinking than Paul, having not had that education).

Edit: one more note…. I’m thinking someone has probably done a whole dissertation—or at least full length paper—on present tenses in John’s epistles. I’ll have to scour the journals I have access to (which is not many without driving to Minneapolis/St.Paul)

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

[Jerry Shugart]

Hi Aaron, the following word “believeth” from the pen of John is in the “present” tense and it does not speak of a continuous action of believing:
I’m in my second year of studying Greek so someone please correct me if I am wrong. The reason why the action of sinning is continual in 1 John 3:9 is because the verb ποιέω is a present active indicative. So it is fair to add the word “continually” to it. The word πιστεύων that you quote in John 5:24 is a present active participle so it doesn’t necessarily contain a continual aspect to it.

I’d recommend a second look at Charlie’s post (#16).

It’s a bit technical but worth sorting out. The gist: the aspect (progressive or punctiliar) has to be determined by the context and there are several progressive presents in the context, especially in reference to sin.

It is not necessary to assert that all present indicatives are progressive/”durative.” They definitely aren’t.

I think Jerry’s view has some strong points as well and (if I understand it correctly) is pretty close to Dr. Houghton’s in the article.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

Ed, I would venture (haven’t really studied) to say that 1:8 is not particularly affected by aspect in such a way that naming it a particular use helps us understand it better. I think the point is that is, if at any point I say “I don’t have any sin,” at that time, I am deceiving myself.

Jerry, your objections are… off topic. Of course John uses present tenses in all sorts of different ways. That doesn’t really matter, and however John uses πιστευ- verbs is likewise irrelevant (although you might want to check Wallace, GGBB, 620-21 and fn. 22).

Of course, the crux of your position (which, Aaron, I don’t think is like Houghton’s) is that “God’s seed abides in him” means “the believer’s new nature abides in God.” Therefore, there is a dualism throughout 1 John. Whenever sin is talked about, it’s the old nature; whenever inability to sin is the topic, John is talking about the new nature. Have I understood you correctly?

If I have, I must object. Sin is not the action of a nature, but of a person. Also, natures are not “born again”; people are. Believers do not have two natures, but one nature that is progressively being renewed in the image of Christ. As such, Christians many times feel as if they are two people (Rom. 7) but ultimately must recognize that who they most truly are is who they are in Christ and who they will one day fully be (Rom 7 + 8).

So, question. To whom or what exactly does Πας ̔ο γεγεννημενος ̓εκ του θεου in 1 John 3:9 refer?

Aaron, here is a link to a fairly brief paper that focuses on the verbs in question in 1 John. It explains more thoroughly some ideas that I presented in this post. http://www.alwaysreformed.com/publicdocs/papers/Tim%20Black%20-%20Exege…

My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com

Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin

I’m sorry, Jerry, I drew some inaccurate conclusions about your position. I understand much better now what you are saying. On the other hand, I still disagree strenuously, and I think one post should be sufficient to show how and settle the matter (at least to the extent that we both understand each other.)

I’d like to start with the verse you brought up: 1 John 3:6 - No one who abides in him [̔αμαρτανει]; no one who [̔αμαρτανων] has either seen him or known him.

You have interpreted the first half to mean whenever a Christian is abiding, he doesn’t sin. Sin here is being taken as a simple present - he doesn’t sin at all. This cannot account, though, for the last half of the verse. Unless the participle is communicating habitual aktionsart, we are left with the unfortunate conclusion that whoever commits a sin has not seen or known God. In John, both “seeing” and “knowing” are metaphors for salvation. So, your contrast is lopsided. Either someone always abides in Christ, which you conceive to be an action which may or may not be true of a Christian at any given point, or he is unsaved. Thus, this very verse rules out the possibility of an unabiding Christian. The result is a reductio ad absurdum against your position.

The only possible escape route is to suggest that the person who has not seen or known God actually refers to the “old man.” But this too is entirely untenable because masculine substantival participles refer to persons, not “natures.” Also, v. 10 clearly expresses that John’s purpose is to distinguish between two kinds of people, the children of God and the children of the devil. He is not distinguishing between two “parts” of believers, or between believers at two different moments.

Your explanation suffers from the further difficulty that v. 9, by your own admission, speaks of the Holy Spirit abiding (or remaining) in the believer, not the believer abiding in Christ. If you equate the two, you are doing so out of mere conjecture. It is much easier to recognize that the Holy Spirit’s abiding is continual and thus has an effect, not totally prohibiting sin but keeping the believer from the kind of continual sin that characterizes the Devil (continual present, v. 8) and his children.

Also, on a more pastoral note, I believe that you have, in this thread, already said you have no sin, and have thereby deceived yourself. Your personal experience be what it may, you have never lived a moment of your life in absolute righteousness before God. Note that your theology of sanctification absolutely rules out progressive sanctification, a massive theological error. According to your scheme, the believer is either abiding, and thereby temporarily sinless, or not abiding, and presumably in complete sin. There is no room for a progressive renewal of the nature in such a system. You are either on or off, and all the biblical language about progressive renewal, transformation, and conformation is nonsensical.

My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com

Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin

I quite agree with Charlie. A Christian does not at some times walk in or abide in the Spirit - if he has the Holy Spirit, he is in the Spirit.

Have a look at Romans 8: “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death”. You are free from the power of sin if Jesus Christ is in you.

“He condemned sin in the flesh” The power of sin is dead.

If you can sometimes walk “in the flesh”, then be warned: “the carnal mind is enmity against God” and “those who are in the flesh cannot please God

You are always “in the Spirit” if you are born again: “But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you”

Jerry, I am going to clarify one thing I said and then let this thread go. I think the explanation and interaction has been sufficient that anyone reading this thread can reach an informed opinion on the matter, and I’m not interested in pursuing the discussion down all the roads you want to go. I know that you didn’t say that you never sin. However, I do believe that even your assertion that there are times when you are walking in the Spirit and it is impossible for you to sin is a self-deception.

My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com

Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin

[nathankeen] I quite agree with Charlie. A Christian does not at some times walk in or abide in the Spirit - if he has the Holy Spirit, he is in the Spirit.

Have a look at Romans 8: “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death”. You are free from the power of sin if Jesus Christ is in you.

“He condemned sin in the flesh” The power of sin is dead.

If you can sometimes walk “in the flesh”, then be warned: “the carnal mind is enmity against God” and “those who are in the flesh cannot please God

You are always “in the Spirit” if you are born again: “But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you”
Maybe we’re getting a bit off topic now, but there’s a problem with this interpretation. I don’t know, off hand, what the solution is, but in Romans 8 Paul does indeed assert that believers walk in the Spirit, yet he also urges them to walk in the Spirit as though it were possible for them not to. Romans 8:12-15 doesn’t appear to make sense unless believers are capable of not living by the Spirit.

And in Galatians 5:16 the command to walk in the Spirit doesn’t make sense unless there is an ability to fail to walk that way.

I suspect that what we have is a tension between our position in the Spirit and our choices to yield to the Spirit… along the lines of Romans 6 (we have union with Christ and are dead and raised with Him yet are commanded to yield our members—a command we have the ability to disobey).

How that helps w/the John passage I’m not sure. :)

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

but the last time i heard this book taught through by Chuck Bonadies in Greenville, SC, he took Ed’s interp. i have the notes penciled in my Bible and they are like this: The book is about (context) the sin of denying the Deity of Christ (first verses of book I John 1:1-3). This particular sin is referred to in several verses like I John 3:6and I John 3:9 and I John 5:16.

I’m popping back in this thread for a moment because I have something new to add. It struck me as I came across a familiar construction in John that there was an element of the case for broad-band presents that I had forgotten. Several times in 1 John, John does not use a simple verb but instead uses the participle ̔ο ποιων (the one who does/practices….) and supplies the object of the action with an accusative noun. Looking through the NT, and especially in the context, I am convinced that John often uses this construction specifically to point to continual action.

John 3:21 - ὁ δὲ ποιῶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν This seems to mean one who practices the truth as a lifestyle, in contrast to the wicked lifestyle in v. 20.

John 8:34 - πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν ἁμαρτίαν δοῦλός ἐστιν τῆς ἁμαρτίας. Once again, this occurs in a context dividing saved from unsaved, see the next verse, v.35. The slave practices a lifestyle of sin, but has no power over the son.

Now, in 1 John, it becomes even more apparent.

1 John 2:17 - ὁ δὲ ποιῶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. In contrast to those whose lives are characterized by “this world” (see vv. 15-16), these practice the will of God.

1 John 2:29 - πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν δικαιοσύνην ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγέννηται. I suppose it is conceivable that one would translate this “everyone who does a righteous act,” but the context seems to indicate that being born of God results in a particular kind of lifestyle change, so that the one born of God “(habitually) does righteousness.”

(By the way, Revelation 21:27 and Revelation 22:15 also use this construction, and they appear to be broad-band presents to me.)

Then, I John 3:4, 3:7, 3:8, and 3:10 all use this construction. So, in addition to my earlier comments on the broad-band indicatives, we have a participle construction often used to convey broad-band and habitual action, especially in the context of separating believers from non-believers, saturating this passage.

My Blog: http://dearreaderblog.com

Cor meum tibi offero Domine prompte et sincere. ~ John Calvin

Interesting. Thanks, Charlie.

-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)

Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA

Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University